From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, Marti Raudsepp <marti(at)juffo(dot)org>, Scott Mead <scottm(at)openscg(dot)com>, Albe Laurenz <laurenz(dot)albe(at)wien(dot)gv(dot)at>, "Andrew Dunstan *EXTERN*" <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: IDLE in transaction introspection |
Date: | 2011-11-04 14:43:48 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoZ_cj0HmDnad_rRZeX7hVu1cuzPnXGKPnCzLZB38SABBA@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 10:34 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> Robert's point about sinval catchup is another good one, though
> I don't remember what that does to the pg_stat_activity display.
My thought was that sinval catchup might require acquiring a relation
lock (e.g. on pg_class), and that might block waiting for a lock.
Not sure it's possible, but even if it can't happen today, it doesn't
seem impossible that we might want to let it happen in the future.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-11-04 14:44:27 | Re: Show sequences owned by |
Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2011-11-04 14:41:53 | Re: warning in pg_upgrade |